Unpacking Immigration Enforcement: Data, Trends, Transparency

Overview 

In Episode 56 of Immigration Uncovered, host James Pittman is joined by returning guest Dr. Austin Kocher, a geographer and research faculty member at Syracuse University, whose work focuses on immigration enforcement, public records transparency, and legal geography.

Dr. Kocher shares updates on the data projects he’s been working on recently, including his continued efforts to uncover how U.S. immigration agencies operate—both at the border and in the interior of the country. Together, James and Austin explore how immigration data is collected, controlled, and challenged and its role in shaping public narratives.

With a focus on how attorneys, researchers, and journalists can better access and interpret immigration data, the conversation also unpacks the widening gap between public claims and on-the-ground realities—and how the use of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is increasingly being constrained by institutional opacity.

Episode Transcript

James Pittman: Welcome to Immigration Uncovered, the 8AM video podcast where we dive deep into the dynamic world of immigration law. I'm your host, James Pittman. Today, we're sitting down again with doctor Austin Kocher, and Austin is a geographer and research faculty member at Syracuse University. He formerly worked at the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. Austin focuses on the intersection of immigration law, data, and federal enforcement, and his work brings critical attention to the immigration court system, deportation policies, and the use or misuse of public data by federal agencies. So Austin helps to make immigration enforcement data transparent and accessible to attorneys, journalists, and the general public. Austin, welcome back to the podcast.

Dr. Austin Kocher: Thanks so much for having me back, James.

James Pittman: Absolutely. So, Austin, over the past year or two, you know, what new projects or lines of research have you been involved in? What's what's keeping you busy nowadays?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. So one of the things I've been really passionate about is turning immigration data into more accessible and more interactive tools. There's been really a a a flood of new data produced into the public domain. One of the main sources these days is the deportation data project. They use Freedom of Information Act requests and litigation to also release data, and they've been really proactive about releasing all of the data that they get so that the public can interact with it themselves. Unfortunately, it does require some technical expertise as well as some software to handle these really large datasets. So a lot of reporters were using them. A lot of researchers are are using them, attorneys as well. But what I wanted to do was say, how do we take these really large datasets and make them more user friendly? So, one of the projects I have recently is the enforcement dashboard. It's at enforcementdashboard.com. And, basically, you can go, and and we have the arrest data up there now. And and rather than having to navigate an enormous Excel sheet, anyone can go there and and check out ICE arrests for yourself, see how many arrests are have happened in your state, you know, who's been arrested, that kind of thing. So that's the kind of projects I've really been interested in. I've taken you know, I'm still doing the research I'm doing, I've been doing for a long time, but but looking for ways, especially in this very politicized and very, yeah, enforcement heavy moment to just help more people understand the system.

James Pittman: Yeah. So let's let's go into some of the trends and datasets that you've been most focused on in the past, say, six to twelve months.

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. So really been looking at immigration enforcement through immigration customs enforcement. So Uh-huh. ICE, obviously, the main enforcement agency in the country. It's really the biggest change we've seen since the Biden administration is that so much of our enforcement for during the Biden administration was happening along The US Mexico border. There were a lot of asylum seekers and refugees coming to the border as well as other folks, and so that was really the center of politics. We have very high record high border crossings for, you know, weeks and months at a time. Those have largely, not gone completely away. There's always always gonna be people coming, to the border seeking asylum or trying to cross, lawfully or unlawfully. But the nature of Trump administration policies and enforcement efforts have have really driven those numbers down quite significantly. Now most of the enforcement activity is happening across The United States. So my shift has really gone from looking at, you know, border patrol and border enforcement to now looking at arrest. You know, right in Chicago this week, we've got, you know, immigration customs enforcement officers on the streets of Chicago doing traffic, you know, pulling people over, arresting people, arresting people, and doing policing and enforcement in different communities across the country and, you know, outside of some businesses and so forth. In fact, they just had a friend who was in Chicago yesterday, James, and they went to get an Uber. They needed to get an Uber to, they were gonna go to a Walmart. They needed to pick something up from a Walmart. And their Uber driver said, I'm not gonna drive you there because they've been picking people up. So I'm really interested in, okay, we take those stories. How do we get data behind those stories to try to tell a more comprehensive picture?

ames Pittman: Well, it's so, you know, it's so incredibly timely. Now I wanna talk about the FOIA and the public, you know, access to public records to shine light on federal immigration enforcement. So, I mean, this the current administration, obviously, is a lot wants to be a lot less forthcoming with data that it, you know, doesn't want people to know about. So what are some of the biggest institutional challenges that you face now in obtaining quality data? I mean, for example, agencies being nonresponsive, or do you see more redactions, more delays? I mean, what what's what what what is the trend?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. So the trend continues to be lots of delays, agencies certainly fighting the public on releasing records. Basically, what this means is that those of us who are requesting records from the federal government, the the strategy for most people and most organizations at this point is you have to litigate. So, basically, ICE's lack of transparency and forthcoming around this data cost the taxpayer money a lot of money because the agency ends up, you know, forcing people to take them to court to get to get records. I'll just give you an example. You know, the Deportation Data Project, again, a great project run by David Houseman out of Berkeley. You know, they have released a lot of data. And I know this because having worked at Track, we did lit litigation as well, so I, you know, I've been in this game for a little while. And and one of the issues that we often run into, one of the one of our approaches is just to say, you know, we're always asking for the same thing. We're always interested in arrest. We're always interested in people in detention, and we're asking you to make them public. And what happens inevitably is we send in a public records request, they don't respond, or they respond inadequate inadequately, and then someone takes them to court, and they release the records, and then the records are in the public domain. But then that's a one time thing, typically. And so if you want new data that's more timely, you have to go through this entire process again. So people are litigating. They're in court all the time over and over again. A lot of us are saying, you know, you could save the taxpayers money. You could save all of us a bunch of headache, and you could just be more transparent by just proactively publishing this data on a monthly basis. You you would save God only knows how much money they would save if they just did that, and then, you know, we we would all we would all have it, we could all look at it. So in some cases, ICE, immigration customs enforcement, has a culture of with, of withholding data from the public. So in some ways, these things aren't exactly new. On the other hand, the Trump administration, I think, probably even more than just withholding data, has been, in my view, sowing confusion because the administration is making a lot of claims in public about what the numbers say that, either contradict the data that we have and and that we know about the agency, or there are claims about what the data says that has no basis in data. They're not they're not really providing us with any evidence that what they're saying isn't just being pulled out of hat. So that's really where I am. And so a lot of a lot of what I'm doing is trying to piece together, okay, the administration said this. Is that a plausible and defensible thing to say? You know? Is it a matter of interpretation? They're maybe they're just interpreting things differently. Or is it really not defensible, and they're either making it up or or or not really acting in good faith.

James Pittman: Absolutely. And I wanna ask you about your selection criteria. So in your in your work, how do you decide which, enforcement trends and, therefore, which datasets are worth investigating deeply? What's walk us through the selection criteria or the or the approach. Is it hypothesis driven? How do you decide?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Yeah. It's a great question. So it's usually I'm doing two things at once. So one thing is there's just I'm always going after new data. At this point, those of us who do this work professionally have a pretty good idea of the data that the that the immigration enforcement agencies have. So it's there's a little bit of, like, newness where I'm always interested in, like, you know, there might be a couple new fields. There might be some new data that I'm now interested in that I hadn't thought about before. But I would say 80% of it is just trying to get data I already know the agency has and I'm already comfortable working with. And that's just like a steady churn. Nothing really changes in that regard. The other piece is oh, I should say one more thing about that. I'm typically going after comprehensive data. So I'm not going after just like give me a number. I'm saying I want the complete anonymized, of course, anonymized dataset of ICE arrests from the last year or the last five years. And once I have that comprehensive dataset, then the other piece is this. I'm always following legal changes, policy changes, what's going on in the news, what is the current administration, whoever that is, what are they announcing that they're going to do, or what have they just announced. And then what I do is try to form a bridge. And I say, this is in the news. This is the data that I have. How do we form a bridge of these two things and say something interesting and valuable to the public? I'll just give you a concrete example. There was a spike in ICE arrests over the summer. We heard a lot about what was going on in California, but, actually, it was also happening in Texas and Florida, which got a lot less press coverage. But Texas actually has more arrests than any other state, recent months. And the administration, again, they were claiming as they've been claiming that they were going after serious, you know, hardened criminals, whatever that means to them. But looking at the data, one of the things the data shows unambiguously is when you look at ICE's own data on, you know, when they make an arrest, they they have a field that says, does this person have a criminal conviction? Do they have pending criminal charges? Or do they only have some kind of immigration or possible immigration violation? Violation. Right? So in the spike of arrests over the summer, all of the lines you know, the the number of people who had criminal convictions, that that line, month by month how many arrests there were, stayed the same. How many, you know, people had charges, that line stayed the same. What we saw in the surge of arrests over the summer was that third one, people with no criminal history, the number of arrests that happened by week by week and month by month, that is the thing that spiked. And so that that's an example of what we call a data story. The data actually has a story in it, and when you take the story of that data with the story of what's happening in the public domain, then you have something to say. And that and that's always what I'm looking. I'm looking for how do I give people a headline and a takeaway. And then, of course, I'm always looking for, like, you know, the the the 5% of people out there who are, like, a little nerdier. I always write you know, I write the method. I write some of the details and, like, how do you do this for yourself? Because I want people to understand it. But that's that's for, like, a smaller audience. I always start with that with that main story.

James Pittman: So, yeah, I I totally understand how you are really interested in in sort of painting the picture with the broad the broader trends and looking for the data that gives you kind of a comprehensive picture of what's going on so that, you know, it makes it understandable to the public. Now let's look at it. In the recent months, you know, there have been a number of claims concerning arrests, removals, etcetera, that the administration's made. So when you compare the statements that the administration's making with the data, walk us through some of the main disconnects that that you see.

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. So one, you know, as I as I mentioned a second ago, has to do with the the the disconnect between claims that everyone they're arresting are serious, hardened criminals and what the data actually says. It's a more complicated picture. You know, one of the things I always like to emphasize is, you know, I'm not my research is not partisan in any way or, or overly politicized. So the data says both things. It's true that ICE is arresting people with criminal convictions. It's also true that that represents a smaller percentage than the administration is claiming. So in some ways, my sometimes my work either makes everyone happy or no one happy. So but that's, you know, it's what the data says. The biggest disconnect for me right now, and I'm writing about this a little bit, hopefully, I'll have something out next week, is their claims about deportations. So the data that we have on deportations typically comes from ICE. ICE immigration customs enforcement, specifically enforcement removal operations, as many of your list listeners will know, is the agency that typically does the the removals. Now when we look at the numbers of ICE ERO removals deportations, this year, it does not show that much difference than the Biden administration last year. Last year, the Biden administration deported 271,000 people. It was the highest in ten years. There was more deportations last year during the Biden administration than any year of the first Trump administration, actually. COVID had something to do with that, but not just COVID. The administration is now claiming much higher than that, somewhere above 300,000, 350,000. And they've also even said that maybe they've contributed to over a million, undocumented immigrants leaving the country altogether, and they're using some combination of some economic inferential observations, you know, to try to say that. The short story is none of the numbers that they're claiming do we actually have evidence for.

James Pittman: Mhmm.

Dr. Austin Kocher: That's not to say that there hasn't been more deportations, but the concern that I have, and I think other reporters who cover this has, have, is I'm a little worried that it's either they're counting things that have never really counted as deportations before, or they're engaged in some kind of funny math that maybe there's some evidence for it, but they're not being forthcoming.

James Pittman: Right.

Dr. Austin Kocher: I think the other question is, are they just sort of rhetorically inflating their numbers to make it sound like they've done so much more than Biden. And to be clear, they have. They've on the enforcement front, obviously, we're in the middle of a, you know, mass deportation campaign. However, you know, again, when you come down to show me the mass, show me the numbers, they haven't been able to do that on their deportation claims. And I have some ideas about how they're getting there, but but it's it's worrisome in that regard.

James Pittman: Yeah. I mean, it's like the old adage that, you know, statistics can be made to to point to whatever you wanna point to. I mean, so they could be Yeah. Just spinning the interpretation of the numbers. They could be cherry picking the numbers. They could be taking the numbers out of context, a variety of things. So let me ask you this broader question with that in mind. So how do you interpret you know, how much power does the data have to shape narratives, and to, you know, how do you interpret the public's hunger for the raw numbers with regard to this enforcement? I mean, do you find, journalists, you know, picking up on this, on some of these distortions? Do you believe in the power of the data to to you must, obviously, right, this is your area. I mean, give us let clue me in on your understanding about the role that the data plays in in shaping the narratives.

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. I think it plays a really powerful role. I, you know, I think that human beings are ultimately moved by story, and often that's human story and human relationships. So I I think there's nothing more powerful than, you know, if we want to have productive, healthy conversation and debate in this country, we have to be able to sit down with people who are different from us, who have different backgrounds, who have different, you know, beliefs. So I I think the power of human story and the power of of relationship is, in my mind, is always going to be at the top of that, you know, pyramid of things that that really make a difference. That being said, the data does play a tremendous role and often a little bit of an invisible role because, you know, everyone wants to believe that their ideas are informed by reality and informed by data. Everyone wants to feel like their values and perspectives are objective in some sense, where they're grounded in some kind of reality. And so, you know, most people even, you know, a lot of people that I may not personally agree with in terms of our politics, when they they know that my work is driven first and foremost by data, they're willing to trust the data. They know that I'm transparent about, you know, the process and and when I'm imposing my interpretation versus just what the numbers say. And what that means for me is I'm able to have conversations with a broad spectrum of reporters, you know, from outlets, again, that that are really much more diverse than I think a lot of academics who write about this, and I feel very fortunate about that. I also think readerships for these papers, news outlets, you know, social I see this on social media. I see this because I write on Substack a lot. People are actually moved by the data, not just by the data by itself. You know? I no one's gonna be inspired by the Excel spreadsheet. But I think when you when you respect the reader and you respect the American public and you say, look, I know that you're not an expert in this one little niche data science area of whatever, but I'm not gonna talk down to you. I'm gonna respect your ability to make sense of this. Let me I'm gonna tell you what the numbers are. I'm gonna tell you what they say. I'm gonna walk you through it, and now I want you to make a decision about how you're gonna incorporate that within your, you know, your social and your political framework. Actually, that really does open up the door to conversation, and I honestly believe that it changes minds. I think there is probably a certain minority on both sides of whatever spectrum we're on that they're just never gonna listen, but I think there's a lot of people who have a real hunger for just, you know, immigrant you know, because this is an area you've spent your career. It's complicated. There isn't a week that goes by that you and I aren't also learning new things, and so how could we expect everyone so I just yeah. So I really I I think the data does play a powerful role in helping people to to understand the system and to form more educated perspectives.

James Pittman: Now, your background is in legal and political geography. So, you know, to what extent is the work that you're doing on immigration enforcement really how do you how do you utilize the the methods of geography? And do you is what you're doing now, do you think still sort of it does it fit within the parameters of conventional, you know, geography research? And, you know, have you adopted any methodologies from other fields that you're using?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. My work is definitely very interdisciplinary, but I still consider myself squarely rooted in geography. Geography is a discipline, social science discipline, that's really interested in understanding space and power and society. No issue represents that better than immigration. Immigration is fundamentally a question of who belongs where, and a question of borders and legal systems. So this is all very geographic in our in our contemporary world. And one line of of method and research within geography as a political and legal geographer is we're very interested in systems of power. And I would say the immigration system and immigration enforcement agencies qualify as systems that have a tremendous amount of power. We see that. We, you know, we see that in ICE enforcement activity. We see that in, the ability of agencies to hold people in geographically constrained, you know, architectures that we call detention centers. So in that regard, studying state institutions is very squarely within that. But I absolutely incorporate, you know, the work of anthropologists who are who study institutions but from a perspective of human narrative and human experience. You know, even though I study data on the courts, I've actually spent a good part of my professional life in courtrooms, observing immigration court hearings, interviewing people in the removal process, interviewing immigration attorneys across the country, really understanding not just what's supposed to happen, but what actually happens in these institutions on an everyday level. And the same is true for, you know, drawing on the work of of of, critical data science and data science studies where, you know, much of the this is actually kind of a misconception. A lot of the work that I do with data is not very statistically sophisticated in the sense that, you know, like a statistician would do. A lot of it is data science in the sense of, oh gosh. Here's a bunch of data. Here's a bunch of messy data. How are we gonna make sense of it? How's this how do we tell this story? And so it's it's always a mix of that. So I I, yeah. I absolutely draw on on a lot of different disciplines, and I draw on your field. I mean, I draw on I draw on the work of immigration lawyers and legal studies, to to help me think about, how we can think critically about the immigration system.

James Pittman: Yeah. It's really about sort of clarifying the data, putting the data in context, and helping to interpret the data. Now, you mentioned that your work is nonpartisan, and obviously, you see yourself as a scientist who is, you know, striving to articulate, you know, scientific truths, and then the chips, you know, forward they may. But can you can you articulate for me your philosophy about how you how you approach this work?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. So I think, you know, first and foremost, I'm a deep believer in government transparency. I think democracy needs transparency, needs government transparency. It's a hallmark of, you know, our modern political systems and, you know, the ability to to to have an informed public that can make decisions. So, you know, I would say one pillar of that philosophy is transparency and understanding above all. It's also kind of my philosophy of teaching as a teacher and as an educator. I you know, one thing I often say is I'd rather have an informed conversation with someone I disagree with than a boring conversation with someone I already agree with. And that's that's not just a saying. That's that's really how I feel. So what I would like, you know, in because there's so much misinformation out there and the immigration system is genuinely convoluted, you know, in a way, I would almost say, if I'm doing anything, it's I would like more educated and more informed opponents on this issue because I'd rather have that conversation than have a conversation that's saturated with misinformation. I you know, the amount of my life that was spent responding to people and reporters about, you know, the vice the vice presidential candidate's claims last year about refugees eating dogs and cats in my home state of Ohio in Springfield, you know, half and half from where I grew up. I mean, I don't wanna spend my I don't wanna spend a minute of my time having that conversation. I'd like to have an informed conversation with someone who may not believe who who, you know, who may have more conservative or more restrictionist views than I do, but who's committed to reality. You know? That's the conversation I'd rather have.

James Pittman: Yeah. Absolutely. I think we all I think we all would. Yeah. So let let me ask you this question. So we're in the middle of the government shutdown, and is the shutdown or an institutional closure, you know, impacting your work at all?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Absolutely. The main data sources that I rely on, you know, all of that is that that spigot is turned off right now. Normally, I would have received what we all would have ICE would have published new data on detention across the country. That's something I write on every two weeks when they release that Typically, that would have been out last Thursday or Friday. It's not out, obviously, because they're not working. The same is true for the immigration court data. That data is released on a monthly basis. Typically, I would have a look at that. But, again, you know, it's the October now. So, you know, September data, October data, all of this could could lead to some delays. Now, that being said, even with the government shutdown, there's a lot of data out there. There's a lot of Mhmm. There's a lot more that I want to do with data I already have. So I'm making the most of the time, but it does mean that in terms of getting really timely data, we're gonna be out of luck.

James Pittman: Has has the has the government's digitization efforts in recent years made an impact on your work? So we have the CBP one app. We have various electronic case tracking systems, various APIs now available in government databases. How has that impacted the work that you do?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Thank you. Yeah. So, I mean, one of the main areas of digitization is FOIA. These agencies have gone to, you know, more of a dashboard, electronic portal. Yeah. You you probably remember, I mean, up until very recently, you just emailed an email address Yes. To send in a foyer request, which is Right. You know? And that transition has been clunky. So having a lot of foyer requests in queue, not all of them successfully made it through the transition into the new system, so it hasn't been perfect. So that's impacted the work a little bit on the fringes. The other areas of digitization, it's c b p one certainly has, I actually have some really good data on c b p one that I'd like to publish, so that's one of the datasets I've been thinking about. As the government continues to use more digital technology to do its work, the more opportunity there is to request data from those sources. So, you know, every time the government, you know, government used CBP one as a humanitarian parole tool during the Biden administration, obviously, that's been shut off, and they changed that to CBP home now, which allows people to leave the country and register their departure that way. Every time something like that happens, of course, the first thing that occurs to me is, oh, I'm gonna file a public records request. We're gonna get some eventually, we're gonna get some data about that. So that's both an opportunity and also presents new challenges because the, you know, the the amount of data that's out there and growing, as well as the amount of data the administration does not want to release, continues to multiply.

James Pittman: Have you been called on to use any of your research in any litigation around immigration enforcement?

Dr. Austin Kocher: I have actually, recently. Not very often, but I I was asked recently to submit a declaration for a lawsuit involving one of the recent high profile arrests and detentions of a green card holder who's in the country lawfully, but was arrested for at least what some people would describe as political speech, it seems like. And that person was transferred from a detention center very close to where they live to a detention center very far away from where they live, under the auspices that the administration was saying, well, detention center was too full at the time. We wanted to move this we needed to move this person to a detention center where there was more beds. Well, thanks to the work of my colleague Adam Sawyer and and our work over at detentionreports.com, where you can actually see what the recent numb recent number of detained people are at every single facility that's in use, we could actually look at that data and say, based on the time period that that person was transferred, there was overpopulation at the facility you sent this person to, and there was actually free beds available based on what we know at the facility that you transfer them away from. So that rationale that the person was transferred based on, you know, detention space, doesn't seem, you know, legitimate. Again, it was a very narrow declaration. I wasn't taking a position on the case, but but the attorneys did reach out and asked me to to help make help them make sense of that data, and I was I was happy to.

James Pittman: Yeah. I mean, I I think that, with with your expertise, certainly, you know, in in in the form of, emissi, briefs on appellate litigation, supreme court litigation, as well as as an expert witness, I think you you've really there's space if you ever wanted to really get more involved in in the ongoing litigation. There's definitely space for your expertise and and would be called upon. But let me ask you this question. How has the how has the development of the latest, you know, artificial intelligence tools made an impact on your work? I mean, are you talk talk about the extent to which you're using AI in your work, and if you can, talk about the extent to which the government may be using AI, if you if you have any thoughts on that.

Dr. Austin Kocher: Certainly. I think the government is what I would describe, is at a very preliminary stage of figuring out what AI can do. It certainly has been deployed in different contexts. The Canadian government, has already used AI around its screening system for arrivals. That's kind of interesting. I think The US is probably I I'm not aware that AI is at the forefront of any of the work the government is doing. I am aware of ways that they're trying to use it to help maybe manage dockets and and and experimenting with managing some first run, you know, adjudication kinds of rubrics and things like that. In my own work, you know, I'm very AI positive. I mean, I I acknowledge the environmental impacts and potentially the, you know, the cognitive impacts of AI on young people as well, but I do use it in my work. I don't use it hardly at all for data analysis, but I do use it to both in in helping me think about, you know, answering some simple questions, direct you know, usually, again, not so much putting data in and getting answers out, but sort of thinking through almost as a kind of conversation partner. And sometimes it's just helpful to have, you know, help me think of a better title for this paper or for this article. I just you know, sometimes when you get into data and you're into the writing, it's hard to, like, break free. So so I use it as a supplementary tool, for that, or for testing, you know, code. If I'm, you know, if I'm using code to do analysis, I might need to I might wanna test that out or get you know, I might have a bug that I'm trying to, like, resolve. AI is really great at all of those things. I do tend to avoid using AI to do any original thinking or original writing that would go into a final product just because I I like you know, I spent years developing my own writing voice, so I wanna keep that. But I I find it very helpful. I think one thing that's I get this question a lot, James, and specifically with the kind of data that we're looking at in immigration, I'm sure that smarter data scientists and developers are are maybe there's possibilities I'm unaware of. I think administrative immigration data that I deal with, it's very quirky and very domain specific. It requires a lot of content area knowledge to make sense of. So at least so far, I don't I haven't seen any application where the core part of my work is is being offloaded to AI. I'm sure it'll happen at some point, but I haven't seen that yet.

James Pittman: So if you had to pick a next frontier, some underexplored area of the immigration data that you would like to tackle but you haven't yet, what would that be?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Oh, that is a great question. This is the kind of stuff I I wake up having dreams about, like, oh, that'd be great, and, you know, my my my brain's always churning on that. I mean, the State Department has a lot of data that's really underleveraged. The State Department, as you know, is the they are the front lines of processing people who are trying to come to The United States lawfully in some way. They do proactively release data that that's very helpful on on visas, immigrant and nonimmigrant visas, but the State Department is notoriously difficult to get public records from through the FOIA process. Notoriously difficult. Much harder at this point than even the immigration agencies. At consular non reviewability. Exactly. You get it. So there's so many of those decisions. I mean, we're so used to the asylum decisions now, aren't we? We're like, oh, we understand how immigration judges work. We need to apply that same methodology to understanding consular processing and visa determinations.

James Pittman: I think that would be an excellent area for further inquiry because those that has always been a a black hole due to the doctrine. And them you know, they they just they're not, those decisions are not judicially reviewable. People really didn't have any legal recourse to contest many visa issuance or denial decisions. And so you would get the most vague, you know, pro form a responses from consular officers. So, you know, any any anything that can be done to drill down on the trends and and try to tease apart what's really going on in that black black box, I think, is an excellent candidate. The thing is, you know, the the it does the legal framework. I mean, is there enough publicly visible data in those determinations that, you know, you can actually make conclusions from?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Yeah. There's some you It's difficult. It's really difficult.

James Pittman: Yes.

Dr. Austin Kocher: is. Because we don't have any what we really need is record level, individual anonymized record level data with with some variables to really make sense of it, and we don't really have that or we don't have much of that. There's some isolated incident. So it's really difficult. I, you know, I I I'm you know, there's enough going on with the with the courts courts and and DHS, DHS, but if I had the time to do it, I mean, I just think I think it would be a value added to the American public, not I don't think it would undermine the state department's work, and I think there's level of levels of abstraction where we wouldn't have to study individual con you know, con officers at consulates. There could be some geographic abstraction. There could be some other abstractions that might help us to understand trends in a certain part of the world or maybe a certain office or a certain time period that would hopefully balance public interest with, you know, state department, you know, mission and objectives, and that's probably where I would hope to start.

James Pittman: Now, you were formerly at TRAC, which used to be at Syracuse, but is now not at Syracuse anymore. Are you maintaining your own database of your findings, or how how best can people access your findings?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. I I absolutely do. I you know, my my data research preceded track and obviously continues well after them. My main platform for making things publicly available is Substack. James Pittman: Okay.

Dr. Austin Kocher: Unless you also wanna follow my academic work and read some of my academic articles, I really try to write very often on Substack at austin kocher dot substack dot dot com. I've also been trying to host some conversations with with authors, with, you know, impactful books that kind of showcase the latest research and include conversations around data there. So that's really the main place. And, again, like I said, because I not only study transparency, I believe in transparency, any data that I use for something I write up or any visualizations, I also make all all that available. So that's probably the best place. Although, I also mentioned my work at detentionreports.com with Adam Sawyer, and also enforcementdashboard.com, which takes a look at ICE ICE ICE enforcement data.

James Pittman: Do you think that law firms are making are utilizing the data to, you know, to the extent that they should? I mean, do you or or are do you is your sense that lawyers are underutilizing the data? Are you getting a lot of inquiries? Do you see have you seen examples of filings, memos, appellate briefs, etcetera, where the data is being, you know, used in the way that it could? Or do you think that lawyers need more sort of education on how to best use the data?

Dr. Austin Kocher: I definitely think more education is is warranted. I think it makes a stronger complaint and a stronger case when you're able to contextualize what you're arguing within the broader system and show how if it is the case, how show how it's a a a broader pattern, just to lay the record for it not just being about one person. On the other hand, I mean, are attorneys out there who are, and I think more than ever, attorneys really are trying to figure out how to use data, and so I do get questions about different filings. Typically, the questions that come in to me are more like, hey. I've got this case, and either we're we're ready to file or we've already filed. We just wanna know, is there data on this thing that might be useful? And sometimes there is, sometimes there isn't, but that's usually, like, a first level conversation I have. The other thing I would say that I think is kind of underleveraged, really is firms' own case docketing. You know? For those firms you know, this is this is an you know, I think you will empathize with this point, James. But, you know, if firms are still running on paper, it's really hard to get a full picture of of of of your own universe of information. And I think there's a lot of firms out there who, frankly, have maybe more the potential for more useful data driven kinds of tools and decision making than they realize. But, you know, again, you know this because this is this is your field as well, is, helping attorneys understand what technology can do for them Right. And how to leverage it. That in itself is a little bit of a a a of a learning curve. And once once people get it, they get it. But if they haven't been exposed to it in law school or in another firm, then it's just it it's just a little bit it takes some conversation. James Pittman: Yeah. I mean, maybe there's there's definitely, I think, room if you wanted to take your some of your findings and put together put them together in either a guide or a book form Really? You know, where you can educate the legal community on how to use this data and and and and what the data is that's out there and how it can be used in legal cases. Mhmm. I think there that would make an excellent book on uses of you know, I there's not too I haven't seen a book like that out there, and I think it would be a good addition is, you know, uses of uses of data in in immigration litigation, uses of data in, you know, in in visa in visa applications, substantiating visa applications, and uses of immigration data in in in appellate cases and and things like that in federal litigation. Mhmm. So if you ever wanted to undertake writing a guide like that, I think that would be just a great project.

Dr. Austin Kocher: Thank you. I I just made a note of that. That's a great idea.

James Pittman: So looking ahead, like, in the next five years, I mean, where do you where do you see your focus? Where do you see yourself honing in?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Sure. So I think the the the next three years of this administration will continue to be a period of intense immigration enforcement and controversy. So my my fur my top priority is to stay on top of that. At the same time, again, looking out the next three and then three to five years, is definitely, moving into a period of of work where I'm stepping back a little bit and thinking, I mean, to your point, you know, writing a book that helps to unpack, this whole field of immigration data transparency and why it's so important, and maybe how better transparency and better understanding of the fundamentals of the data might help us deal with problems of misinformation and polarization. I think if we we understand the basics and we understand what the numbers say, again, just at a at a nonpolitical level, I think it helps to overcome a lot of the artificial divisions that we have. And so that's also a big part of where I'd like to move to is is how do we get that message out to more people, including people beyond, you know, our worlds who are who are in immigration and we know already care about this. How do we also bridge that gap with people who are kind of on the edge or not really already in the immigration world? How do we help them, think more clearly about things? So that's really where I'm going, and and I also feel like I'm at a point in my career where, you know, being able to make suggestions to administrations from either party who are willing to listen and to figure out how we move from the analysis and finding the problems to Yes. How do we find solutions?

James Pittman: Right. And, you know, and there are various think tanks and various policy institutes out there where I think your expertise would make a would make a huge difference in terms of making those policy recommendations. Let me ask you this question. Are there policies that are coming out like the Trump gold card, which Okay. Was originally a $5,000,000 citizenship by investment program? That was the original proposal. That never that didn't come to fruition, but that they're now it's been dialed down to a $1,000,000 or $2,000,000 if you're being sponsored by an by a company sort of permanent residency pathway, which they're tying into the e b one and e b two employment based immigration categories. It's basically expedite. They're trying to piggyback off the e b one and e b two statutory framework. But anyway. And then there's another proposal for a Trump platinum card, which is, again, the $5,000,000 citizenship by investment. But that one isn't even it it hasn't gotten off the drawing board. It's it's only a website where you can, you know, input your email and if you're interested. But the goal the the gold card pathway to permanent residency is something that's being done. I mean, that is something that's in the works, and it's it's actually officially officially, you know, been rolled out with a with an executive order, but it hasn't act I don't it's not been implemented yet, but it you know, supposedly, this pathway exist, or they say it exists. Yeah. So that's one example. Another example being this huge change in the h one b filing fee to a $100,000 for new petitions. So stories like that, these major changes, are there any of those that you are really looking forward to in terms of what you, you know, that they might create, important new stories, data stories?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Absolutely. I I think the, you know, following the Visa data that is out there in the public domain closely to see, you know, how many people take advantage of this or attempt to take advantage of this. I think that will be important. I also think this is just another area where we are living in a moment, you know, where changes to the immigration system kind of operate on on different levels. So there's the claim that something's going to happen, and, you know, sometimes it's a little over the top or if it's it's a little sensational. And one sort of has to dig into, like, what this is actually going to mean in reality. So, you know, in the past, when there was changes to these systems, it would follow a more conventional path that might be a administrative policy announcement that they're gonna do or they can do independently, or it's a there there's a a rule change that's announced, and then you can comment on it, and that's implemented or not, or it's changed. And now we're in this world where it's really hard to figure out what thing is actually rhetoric versus reality. So, again, that's that's the stuff that I'm always watching for. I I sort of have to do, like, a whole third level of work now because it's not just, like, policy change and data. It's first making sense of what is circulating in the public domain as claiming how something's gonna work versus how it's actually gonna work, and then how do we get data.

James Pittman: Have you been called on by to appear in the media to sort of fact check any claims or fact check any, yeah, claims regarding stories in the media that have come out around enforcement or other immigration data?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Yeah. That's a big part of what I do on the public side of things. I do get a lot of calls from reporters about, you know, what's what are some data points that I can use in a story on detention? Yeah. As well as, yeah, yeah, the administration is claiming this. What can I you know is this true? What do you think about this? Okay. Lauren Villagran from the USA Today Network wrote a really good article a couple months ago around the deportation data that I mentioned, and it was, you know, basically, you know, it wasn't it wasn't strictly speaking like a fact check article, but it was very much a an article that said, you know, here what's going on with data in this administration, and how do we make sense of So, yeah, that's a that's a big part of what I try to do. And I, you know, try to tell people if if I think the administration is making a point that's justified by the data, I'll say so. But but a lot of times, it's, yeah, it's it's sort of fact checking and saying, well, you know, that's what they're saying, but that's not really what the data says, and and then we sort of figure out what reality is.

James Pittman: I I do wanna ask about the detention practices because that's something which has is is in the news a lot and people are concerned about, you know, for constitutional reasons and other. So have you seen any shifts reflected in the data on detention practices, meaning, like, transfers from are you are you monitoring that transfers of detainees from one institution to another, duration of detention, anything about the facilities themselves?

Dr. Austin Kocher: Absolutely. All of those things, very interested in. I think, first of all, just figuring out the actual population in an individual facility has taken some real work. ICE doesn't actually publish that data. They publish, you know, average population year to date, but that doesn't give you a very good idea of what's going actually going on now. So that so we figured out a method to make sense of that. So we kind of solved that problem. Length of stay is very important, obviously, how long people are staying in detention. You know, some people are moving more quickly through the detention system. Some people, you know, are staying detained much longer. That's an issue. I think probably the one of the main data points I've been asked about a lot for reasons that that I'll elaborate on a little bit, is how do we square the population of the facility versus the capacity of that facility? And it might sound like an easy puzzle. You might think, well, okay. If you have a detention center, we know that there's a maximum number of people that can stay. So if there's more people than that, it's overcrowded. Right? Well, generally, yes. And there's massive problems with overcrowding at facilities across country, and being able to document that and quantify that has been very powerful. At the same time, what I've learned a lot this year, James, is that I've learned a lot more about how detention population or detention center capacity is quantified. And there's not just one number. There's actually several. There's normal capacity. There's emergency capacity. There's you know? And so so then what that has has taken me into is, yeah. I'm really interested in this, but then figuring out what these numbers are and how to get them because they're not they're not all very public about these numbers. These the the private detention contractors in particular are not very transparent. And all of this matters because we have so much critical work on the consequences of overcrowding, the consequences of rapidly creating these new detention centers, and what that means for whether or not they can provide adequate medical care and food and and all of this. In fact, you know, I've been working with the Women's Refugee Commission to to help them build a tool to track detained pregnant women, which is now ballooning in the system, and there's, you know, verified stories of women having miscarriages while they're in ICE custody, or being so malnourished that by the time they are deported, say back to Guatemala, they're unable to nurse their infants because they they they simply haven't eaten any food that would allow them to to nurse in that way. So there's a lot at stake here, and I can't do it all, but I can try to do my part in trying to provide clarity around the numbers.

James Pittman: Yeah. As they say, light is the best disinfectant. Right? I mean, bringing bringing these practices to light and and getting the real story out there through the data into the public eye into the public mind, in front of the public eye, I should say. It's it's just so so very important what you're doing, and I I think that it's it's full impact, I think, is, you know, as with many things, is is is only appreciated by people who are in this little corner of things. But it's really, with the place that the immigration enforcement is occupying in our national discourse right now, the work that you're doing is just so so very important, which is why I wanted to have you back today to to go into these more recent details and trends. So I I I I do hope that you'll come back again in the future as as things evolve. I mean, we've got believe it or not, it's only been, what, ten months or of this administration or even less, and and we've got another three three years to go. So I I I want us to continue this conversation. But, you know, thanks so much for coming back, and you've really, you know, enlightened us as to, you know, what's been going on recently. Anything else which you wanna add for now?

Dr. Austin Kocher: You know, I would just say what I say every chance I get, try to have hard conversations with people who don't necessarily agree with us. We've got to find a way to build bridges and heal some of this division, or this immigration situation is just gonna get worse. Yeah. And And thank you so much for hosting the conversation, James. It's great.

James Pittman: Quite welcome. Yeah, that's a that's a let me just comment on that last point is Mhmm. You need someone like yourself, and then you need someone who's really an expert in, you know, the political communication Mhmm. To get together so that, you know, fact based narratives can get out there into the public space. Because we've we're awash. We're drowning, actually, in spin, and we need we need fact fact based narratives. We need fact based narratives. And that requires, you know, that the the facts are heard. Not only not only do you have to find the facts and analyze and interpret the data and make conclusions, but that those findings have to get out there into the public space in a in a style of communication that, you know, where they can be heard, they have to have a platform, and then they have to be styled in a way where people can can understand them. So that's that's quite a task because we're we like I said, we're a wash and spin. So it's super important what you're doing, and I just I just keep going and get get that work out there. But, Austin, thank thanks again for joining us today, and we'll talk again. Absolutely. Thanks again, James.